-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
Document FieldInfo.SetValue breaking change #3869
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
@@ -2096,6 +2096,8 @@ | |||||
## Remarks | ||||||
This method will assign `value` to the field reflected by this instance on object `obj`. If the field is static, `obj` will be ignored. For non-static fields, `obj` should be an instance of a class that inherits or declares the field. The new value is passed as an `Object`. For example, if the field's type is Boolean, an instance of `Object` with the appropriate Boolean value is passed. Before setting the value, `SetValue` checks to see if the user has access permission. This final method is a convenience method for calling the following `SetValue` method. | ||||||
This method cannot be used to set values of static init-only (`readonly` in C#) fields reliably. In .NET Core 3.0 and later versions, an exception is thrown if you attempt to set a value on a static init-only field. | ||||||
jkotas marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||||||
> [!NOTE] | ||||||
> Fully trusted code has the permissions that are needed to access and invoke private constructors, methods, fields, and properties using reflection. | ||||||
|
@@ -2195,6 +2197,8 @@ | |||||
## Remarks | ||||||
This method will assign `value` to the field reflected by this instance on `obj`. If the field is static, `obj` will be ignored. For non-static fields, `obj` should be an instance of a class that inherits or declares the field. The new value is passed as an `Object`. For example, if the field's type is `Boolean`, an instance of `Object` with the appropriate Boolean value is passed. Before setting the value, `SetValue` checks to see if the user has access permission. | ||||||
This method cannot be used to set values of static init-only (`readonly` in C#) fields reliably. In .NET Core 3.0 and later versions, an exception is thrown if you attempt to set a value on a static init-only field. | ||||||
|
This method cannot be used to set values of static init-only (`readonly` in C#) fields reliably. In .NET Core 3.0 and later versions, an exception is thrown if you attempt to set a value on a static init-only field. | |
This method cannot be used to set values of static, `init-only` (`readonly` in C#) fields reliably. In .NET Core 3.0 and later versions, an exception is thrown if you attempt to set a value on a static, `init-only` field. |
jkotas marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
jkotas marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
static and init-only are similar kind of qualifiers. I would either put back-ticks around both or neither.
I do not have a strong opinion about it. I would be happy to apply the suggestion if you prefer to have only init-only in back-ticks. Let me know.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the ECMA spec, they refer to the initonly attribute, but when not referring to a keyword, they use init-only as the general term. So I agree, I don't think we need the backticks here. @BillWagner?
https://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/ECMA-335.pdf
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But we do need a comma between static and init-only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed